Just for the record, it is not a ‘disabled drivers’ badge, it is a ‘disabled persons’ badge. It need not necessarily be a driver who holds one.
Thus, it is not proper for the missus to use the badge on a quick trip to Sainsburys if the holder is not present. Equally, if the holder is not getting out of the car then he/she should park in a usual space and pay any applicable charge.
Also, one is not absolved from adhering to the road traffic regulations just because one has a badge. Parking inappropriately or on yellow lines can still attract a penalty if, in the eyes of an enforcement officer, one has parked in a manner hazardous or inconsiderate to other road users.
Of course, that’s a matter for proper enforcement of the laws and regulations and therefore a whole new ball game!

Dunno about ‘criteria’.
My GP’s support did absolutely no good at all with our local County Council when I applied to have mine renewed a year ago. Don’t have one any more. Too honest, says Mrs Meteor,(although her viewpoint is apt to change to suit her agenda!) It would seem I should have bluffed a bit when filling in my renewal application.
Now, I look reasonably fit (the evidence of the mirror, it is ignored!). I bend in the middle and I do not limp, stagger or drag me feet and I hold down a job, (an office one now – Royal Mail dispensed with my services once it turned out I couldn’t walk more than a hundred yards without needing a sit down; the Big C can do that to you).
Not complaining too much though, it could be a whole lot worse.
My point is that although air displays are a no no these days and I am verboten from any form of lifting, stretching or carrying, (two inoperable hernias thanks to the major mods to my plumbing and as many more as I like if I try to help the missus carry the shopping), I do not look disabled.
Undoubtedly there are wasters out there, as there are everywhere but a disability is something ‘life limiting’ as they say these days. Not everyone whose life is limited looks that way.

I think the point has to be that it is both sad and infuriating – a comment upon our society – that a ‘risk assessment’ should even be thought necessary. Surely some things have to be sacred. Utter low lives!

Cynical but sadly perfect reasoning.

Result!
The missus was in Dragon Mode as I departed to earn the honest crust this morning – personally I wouldn’t have argued with her.
Having studied your invaluable comments and a Consumer Rights website she headed off to Currys. Different manager, same initial response. I can imagine the tense stand off that must have ensued but the Currys guy eventually uttered the immortal phrase , ‘on this one occasion’ and a new charger was forthcoming.
I have to say thanks to you all for your comments and suggestions, but why on earth is it necessary to go through all that rigamarole simply to sort something that should never have needed sorting? Still cross with Currys and thoroughly in tune with the negative reports about their service standards but at least I can be sure that the staff at our local branch won’t be on the receiving end of a homicidal spouse – until next time!

September 2014 and in the grip of a rush of blood to the head Mr and Mrs Meteor hasten to their local Currys and purchase two spanking new Samsung Galaxy tablets, thereby entering the twenty first century a mere fourteen years late. Fast forward five months and one of the chargers goes phut. ‘No problem,’ says Mr Meatbox, ‘they are under warranty, a replacement will be a bagatelle!’
Of course, we reckoned without the modern approach to such matters. Apparently the charger is an accessory and therefore not covered by warranty which refers only to the tablet itself!
Needless to say we laughed (admittedly a little hollowly) in their faces and took our leave. Tomorrow we do battle with Currys on line and by phone; I am not optimistic.

Not so sure about the armament, which by 1941 standards was pretty good, (if compared to say, British vessels), but the gunnery wasn’t great. The torpedo bombers were giving the gunners a near zero deflection shot as they approached which to me shows they weren’t shooting too well. I feel sure that the slow approach speed must have been at least part of the reason for this. Only an opinion, mind and happy to learn more; my naval streak finds the Bismarck episode fascinating

‘Course, a counter argument might point out that, after our withdrawal and given the number of commitments we had left , a rapid deployment capability was essential.; getting rid of the Belfasts in particular left the RAF with no long range heavy lift aircraft. And a few years later the MOD was hiring back the self same aircraft to service the Falklands War. One suspects the real reason was cost and cost alone. Government parsimony is nothing new.